Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A journey into the shaken baby syndrome/abusive head trauma controversy

cambridgeblog.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

601–610 of 639 posts

Re: A journey into the shaken baby syndrome/abusive head trauma controversy

#601

Post by Summershard »

alexashka wrote: post #475
rossant wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is spot on. This psychological barrier is probably the number one obstacle to a wider recognition of the existence and extent of this problem. People like me who challenge the science behind the diagnoses of SBS face an absolutely unprecedented and unreasonable pushback, like I've never seen in any other area. Basically everyone who has worked on this side has faced threats, insults, personal attacks, cancellati…

It's the sunk cost fallacy. This is why Max Planch (German physicist) has quipped that science advances one funeral at a time.

I think the related term, the escalation of commitment, suits this better.

Re: A journey into the shaken baby syndrome/abusive head trauma controversy

#602

Post by 3seashells »

stephen_g wrote: post #127

Amazing that bit about child welfare organisations fighting against the science, when clearly taking children away based on false accusations is clearly far worse for the child’s welfare, not to mention the parents’! It’s just incredible the injustice that can be done in the name of protecting children. I really do wonder if it’s cultural or some kind of innate psychological irrarionality that seems stronger in some…

It's part of the contract cult mechanism. Human tribes for a early version of law by forming contract cults aka religions. For that sexual deviants are hearded into a group to which the family is then ritualistically exposed as a sort of hostage situation that upholds basic providing and welfare contracts. The hysteria is a social fitness signal: "I'm reliably retarded and can be used as a social building block". This is pretty cultural universal, though the cultural baggage with the contact cult may produce different outcomes.

Re: A journey into the shaken baby syndrome/abusive head trauma controversy

#603

Post by stdbrouw »

emodendroket wrote: post #577
Justsignedup wrote: post #10

The worst part here is: He spent months researching 500 medical papers to even realize this was a problem. No way in hell will a single defense lawyer get someone to be able to research enough to figure this out. As stated, how many people are in jail or lost their kids due to something that didn't actually happen. And how many people don't know that a minor bump in the head for a baby could be life threatening, but…

Since having a kid and reading a lot I've been bothered by how clearly a lot of what is labeled as "SIDS" is pretty clearly accidental suffocation. The conclusion is impossible to escape when you begin reading about measures that have "reduced SIDS." Yet I also wonder if continuing to observe this social fiction is just a way of keeping overzealous prosecutors and other crusaders from locking up and treating as depra…

Not an expert but it seems to me you'd be making the same kind of error that the article denounces: attaching equal value to direct evidence on the one hand and inference to the best explanation on the other. If a physician does not observe tell-tale signs of suffocation in an infant, then it is not their role to say "Well, statistically speaking, or logically speaking, pretty good chance it's accidental suffocation isn't it? I'll jot this down as Accidental Suffocation Syndrome" or alternatively "I know in my heart that this is accidental suffocation but let's just call it SIDS for the benefit of the parents" but rather they should simply conclude "there's not enough evidence, therefore this death remains unexplained".

Re: A journey into the shaken baby syndrome/abusive head trauma controversy

#604

Post by cf141q5325 »

conductr wrote: post #216
tivert wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Amazing that bit about child welfare organisations fighting against the science, when clearly taking children away based on false accusations is clearly far worse for the child’s welfare, not to mention the parents’! This is just speculation, but I bet those groups (or their members) aren't always calmly and coolly trying to find the best policies protect the welfare of children. Instead they feel themselves on a k…

> they feel themselves on a kind of righteous moral crusade They see a lot of bad stuff which causes them to have a difficult time admitting that sometimes bad stuff just happens on it's own Reminds me of the police/detectives that "just know he did it" because they don't understand that people grieve differently. I really empathize with the people that don't have a meltdown and cry when they hear some horrific news.…

It gets really obvious when this becomes not just a matter of personal experience but culture. Had the fortune to watch the news about an airplane crash without survivors on a TV channel in Asia. They had a video of grieving relatives from Western Europe who looked utterly gutted and in pain. But since they werent crying and screaming the news anchor had to explain that this was cultural differences.

Re: A journey into the shaken baby syndrome/abusive head trauma controversy

#605

Post by taneq »

tivert wrote: post #174
stephen_g wrote: post #127

Amazing that bit about child welfare organisations fighting against the science, when clearly taking children away based on false accusations is clearly far worse for the child’s welfare, not to mention the parents’! It’s just incredible the injustice that can be done in the name of protecting children. I really do wonder if it’s cultural or some kind of innate psychological irrarionality that seems stronger in some…

> Amazing that bit about child welfare organisations fighting against the science, when clearly taking children away based on false accusations is clearly far worse for the child’s welfare, not to mention the parents’! This is just speculation, but I bet those groups (or their members) aren't always calmly and coolly trying to find the best policies protect the welfare of children. Instead they feel themselves on a k…

This always seems to happen to activist groups. They start mistaking their intermediate goals for ‘the cause’ and next thing you know, they’re actively fighting against solutions to their alleged issues because those solutions would impact their self-selected KPIs.

Re: A journey into the shaken baby syndrome/abusive head trauma controversy

#606

Post by ameister14 »

michaelmrose wrote: post #587
ameister14 wrote: post #531

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do. If a child has a serious injury the circumstances should be examined, as it should be quite rare for children to have serious injuries. That's why places have Child Death and Serious Injury Review Committees.

So in order to form an informed opinion we have to figure out the relative costs and benefits of various options. Lets start by examining assumptions. Here we have Fractures among children: incidence and impact on daily activities https://injuryprevention.bmj.com/content/4/3/194 wherein we discover that kids 0-12 break bones at an incidence of 128 per 10,000. Over 12 years that's more like 1536 or about 15% of kids i…

First things first - 85% of the fractures you're talking about are arm and leg fractures. Skull fractures, which was what I was talking about, are a significantly smaller number.

But yes, we should investigate why the child broke their arm. Does that need to be an in-depth investigation? Not usually. But it's important to understand why these things happen; that's where the data for the study you cited comes from.

Re: A journey into the shaken baby syndrome/abusive head trauma controversy

#607

Post by rossant »

emodendroket wrote: post #577
Justsignedup wrote: post #10

The worst part here is: He spent months researching 500 medical papers to even realize this was a problem. No way in hell will a single defense lawyer get someone to be able to research enough to figure this out. As stated, how many people are in jail or lost their kids due to something that didn't actually happen. And how many people don't know that a minor bump in the head for a baby could be life threatening, but…

Since having a kid and reading a lot I've been bothered by how clearly a lot of what is labeled as "SIDS" is pretty clearly accidental suffocation. The conclusion is impossible to escape when you begin reading about measures that have "reduced SIDS." Yet I also wonder if continuing to observe this social fiction is just a way of keeping overzealous prosecutors and other crusaders from locking up and treating as depra…

A tiny selection of the relevant literature:

[1] https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/(SICI)1099-0...

[2] https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1046/j.1440-1754....

[3] https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12024-014-9600-5

[4] https://publications.aap.org/pediatrics/article/143/5/e20183...

Re: A journey into the shaken baby syndrome/abusive head trauma controversy

#608

Post by cf141q5325 »

rossant wrote: post #225
tivert wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Amazing that bit about child welfare organisations fighting against the science, when clearly taking children away based on false accusations is clearly far worse for the child’s welfare, not to mention the parents’! This is just speculation, but I bet those groups (or their members) aren't always calmly and coolly trying to find the best policies protect the welfare of children. Instead they feel themselves on a k…

Exactly. I met many people like this. The notion of groupthink comes to mind: "Unquestioned belief in the morality of the group, causing members to ignore the consequences of their actions." See https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groupthink

Do you ( or anyone else ) have an idea about how to deal with that? Not just on a group level but also on an individual one?

The willful ignorance of the dissonance between proclaimed intention and consequences is one of the scariest phenomenons i have experienced and its among proper mob mentality turning in a charged violence prone environment.

Being a bit of a smartass (OFCOURSE just as a teen :) i prodded a bit when some family friend got into some superficial moral signaling about the evils of child labor. I asked how exactly the alternative looks without social safety nets in the relevant regions. Being convinced of having the moral high ground an emotional fever set in and it went as far as a "Well maybe then they should all starve!". Pretty sure i saw the realization of what i just goaded out and if hateful stares could kill i would have been a goner. It has been almost two decades now and the relationship has never recovered. I know some seriously scary people but this is up there.

edit: Sorry for the late edits, was hard to read.

Re: A journey into the shaken baby syndrome/abusive head trauma controversy

#609

Post by Shorel »

startupsfail wrote: post #575
RoyalHenOil wrote: post #546

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Priors should never, ever factor into it like this. I was a foster child who was taken from my parents wrongly. A third party (not connected to child services) made a false accusation to the cops, who took me and turned me over to child services without any investigation. Even though I insisted nothing had happened and even though child services failed to produce any evidence (beyond aforesaid hearsay) over the cours…

Have you considered suing the third party that made a false accusation? It seems that they’ve caused suffering and irreparable long term harm. This sounds like something that may have a standing. Perhaps you can sue them and either get some material compensation (if they are well to do) put them through a few rounds of trials in another state or something (if they are poor, this will be a good punishment in itself).…

Why not?

But on the same note, I would also consider suing child services for failing to act according to their own principles and mainly for ignoring evidence.

Re: A journey into the shaken baby syndrome/abusive head trauma controversy

#610

Post by thfuran »

pdonis wrote: post #566
dahfizz wrote: post #554

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My first inclination is to blame DCF workers. > These people are working in the shadows, in darkness," Lamanna said. "They can show up at your house in the middle of the night with no paperwork, no court order whatsoever, and say we’re removing under the B, we’ve decided an emergency exists." > According to DCF’s 2022 quarterly report, about 60% of parents are reunited with their kids within a year after being remove…

Who gave DCF the power to take away kids in the middle of the night without due process? Until we vote out of office the elected representatives who passed the laws that give government agencies such draconian powers, and insist on those laws being changed, we won't fix this problem.

>we won't fix this problem.

I agree.

Post reply on HN